PARLIAMENT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVIII, Issue 220, 15 August 1928, Page 4

PARLIAMENT.

POST AND TELEGRAPH DEPART MENT’S REPORT.

DEBATE ON BUDGET RESUMED.

Most of tlie time in tile House of Representatives yesterday afternoon was occupied by a discussion on tlie annual report of the Post and Telegraph Department, during which reference was made to the action of the Racing Conference in prohibiting the broadcasting of results from the racecourses.

Portion of the afternoon was devoted to the adjourned debate on the Financial Statement, which was continued throughout the whole of the evening.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

fifteon minutes. on politics and not touch on Party politics. Mr E. J. Howard (Christchurch South) agreed with the Prime Minister’s view with regard to broadcasting facing results. Racing was an entertainment of a kind and it would be just as reasonable to demand that the Italian opera should bo broadcast as to say that racing must be sent over the air. The only way in which New Zealand could escape from the broadcasting chaos wo were entering was to do as Britain had done and set up a Broadcasting Board. Mr A. M. Samuels (Ohinemuri) advocated a lower license fee for crystal sets than for valve sets and Mr Horn took up tlie same theme. Hon. K. S. Williams briefly replied, but did not refer to broadcasting and the report was laid on the table. DEBATE ON THE BUDGET. Mr J. R. Hamilton (Awarua) resumed the debate on the Budget. He said lie proposed to confine his remarks to a criticism of the Public Works policy. Ho noticed that about 35 per cent.* of our expenditure was on railways. Times had changed and with the advent of the motor vehicle lie doubted the wisdom of going on with a railway building policy. It was generally acknowledged by those who knew that the East Coast.railway would not pay axle grease and why should they go on doing what was bound to end in a loss? Motors were in every way more serviceable and would do all that anyone required. Wliat then was the use of building lines that were only to become “white elephants?” He wondered why tlie railways were authorised. It seemed to him that the engineers and heads of departments were running the country. Mr Coates: That is most unfair. Tlie lion, gentleman has an opportunity every session to consider railway construction and the Government takes the whole responsibility for what is done. Continuing, Mr Hamilton said that the South Island was not asking for a single railway. Mr Coates: That is not correct. The members for Bnllor and Motueka are asking for lines. Mr Hamilton said that if that was so they had as much chance of getting them as he had of getting an extension to the Stewart Island wharf. Continuing, he proceeded to criticise tlie distribution of the petrol tax which he contended was causing widespread dissatisfaction. County Councils should be allowed to spend tlieir own money at their own discretion.

1 RACES AND BROADCASTING COMPANY.

Per Press Association,

WELLINGTON, Aug. 14. The House of Representatives mot at 2.30 to-day. Hon. K. S- Williams, Acting-Post-master-General, presented the annual report of the Post and Telegraph Department whereupon the Leader of Opposition asked the Acting-Postinnster-General what steps if any his department proposed to take with regard to the attitude of the Racing Conference on the subject of broadcasting racing results. He said the conference seemed to be taking to itself powers over that of the heads of departments and courts. If there was to be any embargo on broadcasting he considered Parliament should impose it. Personally, ho saw no reason why there should bo any embargo. He instanced that they were allowed to hear details of the TunneyHeeney fight and there was no difference between that and racing. It might be said that broadcasting racing might increase gambling, but in his opinion that danger was more imaginary than real. POLITICAL SPEECHES. He also protested against broadcasting being used for the publication of political speeches of one side only. The Prime Minister asked for an instance. Mr Holland mentioned • tlie statement on the Singapore base, which was supposed to be impartial, but which was not. He asked that in future fair play be extended to all parties, as lie feared that .during the coming elections ono side only would be heard. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Avon) said that a good deal of the present trouble was caused by the fact that broadcasting had passed out of the hands of the State and had got into the hands of private monopoly. There was always a tendency for such a monopoly to pander to the powers that be. The Commonwealth of Australia realised that, and a form of nationalisation similar to that prevailing in other countries had been adopted. He expressed the hope that wren the present contract with the Broadcasting Company expired the State would take over the central authority and organise the service. Radio was of groat educational value, hut we were not getting the best results in New Zealand. Replying to Mr Holland’s criticism, the Prime Minister said that the Leader of the Opposition had >no grounds for complaint in connection with the broadcasting of the statement regarding tlie Singapore base. Tho case in that connection was put in such a way that three-fourths of tho members of tlie House would accept it. On the question of the policy of the Singapore base tho Leader of the Opposition was hopelessly out of touch with public opinion. Mr Holland said that lie was not complaining of the Singapore policy. It was a question of a public utility being used in only one way. Continuing, Mr Coates said that if they were to avoid a conflict of opinion in political matters they might have to have a board of censorship which would have to weigh up every word issued. He did not think that was practicable. He did not hold that the use of the microphone in party interests was wise. A statement on a question of general policy might have an educational value, hut when they came to controversial questions, whether, for instance, there was or was not too much borrowing, the whole position became at once complicated. Mr Holland: Then why not prohibit tlie lot?

RATES OF INTEREST. Mr W. E. Parry (Auckland East) resuming tlio debate in tho evening, said that the Budget was full of frills and padding. He objected to the way in which the Budget had been placed before the House. Parliament should be treated as a board of directors and they should have placed before them a complete balance sheet. There was difficulty in the various walks of industry, but there was no cue in the House who could say from tlio Budget what was right and wlrat was wrong. So far as lie oould see the banks were doing very well, while farmers and merchants were passing through hard times. Ho quoted the recent statement of Sir Harold Beauchamp to the effect that the banks had an abundance of money to lend. Ho said it would he interesting to learn where that money came from and why there was no reduction in interest rates to the small trader. Neither were farmers going to get any relief because they were mortgaged to their full limit. No new land was being opened up so that it was clear that no more of the hanks’ money was going to help settlers. He predicted that there, would, be a reduction in imports and consequently a reduced turnover and increased prices, so that workers, who are already suffering will be hit doubly hard as a result of tlie policy pursued by the Government. The remedy for this was to increase the purchasing power of those who were not now able to buy sufficient of local products to give them a fair standard of living. To do this the Government would have to regulate tho imports in ratio to the exports. They must increase the earning power of the workers.

GOVERNMENT HAS NOT INTER-

FERED.

Coming to tho question of the Racing Conference and broadcasting, the Prime Minister said that it was a matter for the conference to decide what of its own affairs it would have broadcast. The Government had not interfered in any way in that since it was a domestic matter. He felt that racing was safe in the hands of the conference in New Zealand and so far as lie could see the point raised by tho Leader of the Opposition was a matter to be settled between the conference and the Broadcasting Company. If either was acting unfairly then it might be for Parliament to interfere. Mr Holland: Is it not a case of the Racing Conference withholding something (he Broadcasting Company want to broadcast?

SOLDIER SETTLEMENTS. Discussing soldier settlements, he denied that the press and people so clamoured for farms for soldiers that the Government was compelled to buy land at high prices. He quoted the New Zealand Herald which described this policy as one of “blunder,” and no words could more strongly, condemn it than those contained in the columns of other leading newspapers. Never had any Government so fine an opportunity to do something for the Dominion. They had 6000 men ready to go on' the land and they had twenty millions of money; but instead of preparing State lands they bought private lands at high prices so that the descendants of the owners could live idly and play golf. The test of success or failure of the Government policy was whether or not production had increased. Notwithstanding the fact that the Government had spent £13,000,000 on soldier settlement, the Government Statistician reported that the production of the country per head of population had not increased since 1911. The Minister of Finance stated in his Budget that there could be no reduction in taxation until production increased so that we found ourselves in a state of stalemate because soldier settlements had not increased the volume of production owing to the Government blundering in that connection. This showed that the Government was not worthy to administer the affairs of this country.

Mr Coates said that there might be another side of the question. The conference might say to the company : “Racing results are worth something to you. How much are you prepared to pay?” Mr J. Horn (Wakatipu) : That is the whole question. The alternative, Mr Coates said,, might be that they should order racecourses to be open to broadcasting, but it was a question whether it was wise. Had the time arrived for that? He doubted it. SIR MAUI POMARE’S RECENT SPEECH. He defended the speech recently delivered by Sir Maui Pomare on the Treaty of Waitangi. He thought that the speech was historical rather than political and anyone who would take exception to it would be difficult to please. Ho suggested that the Leader of the Opposition should try the experiment of speaking through the microphone and seo how be would got on.

Mr Holland: They have never asked mo.

Mr Coates said that he was surprised to hoar that. Personally, he did not realise the task of speaking through the microphone and ho wished it had never come into existence. Ho then referred to the difficulty of selecting matter that would please everyone or that would be political and not touch on party matters. He suggested that the leaders of the Opposition should try and 6ee if they could speak for

POLICY DEFENDED. Mr C. E. Bellringer (Taranaki) contended that if the volume of our production had not increased the value of our products had increased. He defended the soldier settlement policy of the Government and argued that the proportion of failures was nothing like as

great as was generally supposed. If we got out of the problem of settling soldiers on land with loss of five millions wo had got out very well indeed. He maintained that no Government had ever done more for farmers than the present Government. Indeed, if fault was found it was that they had favoured the farmers at the expense of the business community. It had been said that the Government had not found money for farmers, but the fact was that when farmers had good security they had no difficulty in obtaining loans. The State Advances Department was the most popular institution in the Dominion, while rural credit was doing useful service. There was therefore no foundation for the Leader of the Opposition’s criticism that the Government policy in connection with the Post Office Savings Bank deposits had in any way acted to the detriment of farmers. He justified the Government’s refusal to reduce taxation at the present juncture and praised their land policy, especially that part of it which made the roading of new lands a first consideration. MEMBERS’ HONORARIUM. Mr J. G. Eliott (Oroua) complained that the Public Trust Office was charging too much for the administration of certain estates. He suggested that members’ honorarium was too low and should be increased. Ho said that the Government should this session legislate to increase it, such increase to take effect as from Ist January next. That would give the electors an opportunity to send to Parliament men whom they considered worth the larger sum. He then proceeded to speak of the deteriorated land problem, contending that a very large portion of land in the North Island was deteriorating rapdily. This was duo largely to the methods of farming employed by their predecessors who had exhausted the virginal fertility of land. The task of remedying the former errors now fell upon the present generation. FERTILISERS WANTED. This was to be done by the liberal application of fertilisers,, phosphatic in character. These were to bo obtained from Nauru and Ocean Islands. Between the years 1921-27 2,500,000 tons of phosphate rock were shipped from Nauru and Ocean Islands. Of this Australia secured 2,000,000 tonSj while New Zealand obtained only 495,000 tons. The maximum that New Zealand could obtain under the present agreement would be 1,000,000 tons which would be about half our requirement in a few years if the increased demand of recent years continued. He urged that every effort should bo made to secure an increased share of Nauru and Ocean Islands products. Not merely that, but no effort should be spared to secure new supplies of our own. Ho hoped that the Minister of Agriculture would during the debate make a statement on the subject which would give the farmers every assurance that adequate supplies of phosphates would be available to them.

The debate was carried on by Hon. D. Buddo (Ivaiapoi) and Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton). Sir John Luke moved the adjournment of the discussion at midnight and the House rose till 2.30 p.m.